Dealing with Hearsay and Negative Reviews

A client that comes to a meeting or call with a negative opinion, ends the process before it’s even started for many professionals.  But should it? 

Certainly it makes a challenging opening but just because someone starts out with a bad outlook doesn’t mean they won’t change their mind.  The professional’s approach largely dictates whether a negative impression has a lasting effect.  The most common reaction from a professional is to defend the product, service, or organization against the accusation.  The client expects that reaction and it often leads to a polite argument.  It’s a bad way to begin and a professional rarely overcomes the argument through bonding or case studies.  Not taking a defensive stance on hearsay or negative reviews is critical in overcoming a client’s initial negative opinion.

There are three reactions when a client brings up a negative review or hearsay:

• Fold – Some professionals believe that if the client felt strongly enough in their negative opinion to call them out on it, then there’s nothing they can do to change that perspective. 
• Argue the point - No matter how eloquently professionals fight against a negative outlook; they aren’t in a trusted position and will be couched as trying to manipulate the facts. 
• Reverse the situation – This is often a more fruitful strategy.  Rather than trying to argue out of the situation, the professional reverses it.  It’s similar to Judo maneuvers of using an opponent’s momentum against them.

A client of ours, Chris, recently overcame negative attention about his organization.  Chris works for a large non-profit organization that had made news because an employee had embezzled money.  Chris was on a fund raising drive meeting with local business owners to sponsor an upcoming event.  After a short conversation the business owner says, “Look Chris, I appreciate the cause but I know you’ve had some problems with money not  being used for its intended purpose.  I’m not comfortable sponsoring and I don’t want to waste your time.”  Chris felt the translation was, “Chris your organization has known embezzlers and I’m not going to sponsor.  Get out, you’re wasting my time.”

Chris felt the urge to immediately defend himself and his honest co-workers.  It was unfair to let one bad apple be seen as a representative for the rest of the organization.  Instead he said, “I have a feeling I know what you’re talking about, but do you mind telling me what gave you that impression.”  The business owner told him he’d seen the news story and was upset at how much money had not gone toward the intended cause.  Chris admitted it had been a terrible incident and the entire organization was upset and attempting to recoup those funds.  Then he said, “I understand your reservations, you probably have no faith in what we are doing and feel every person at our organization is looking for opportunities to skim some donations for ourselves.”  Faced with such an overwhelmingly negative statement the business owner backed off a bit.  “Well, I’m sure everyone’s not dishonest, you’ve obviously had a positive effect in . . .”.  The business owner went on to explain some of the positive things he had seen from Chris’ organization.

Had Chris argued his organizations positive impacts it likely wouldn’t have had the same effect.  It’s expected and is less than convincing.  Rather than getting into an argument, explore where the negative outlook comes from.  This will provide an opportunity to address the issue and hopefully change the opinion.  At minimum it won’t cause a fight or leave the client with a subtle sense that their prejudice was correct.